Re: Let's add an approved date field to Failures and Techniques

I think you are right - If I understand you. 


There should never be a failure for not using some particular technology or technique unless there is absolutely no other was to meet the SC with any other technology under any circumstance.

Failures mean that if you do this you cannot possibly meet the SC. 
Since the SC are technology independent — it is hard to have a failure due to not doing something in a particular way. 


gregg

> On Apr 27, 2016, at 10:11 AM, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> On 27/04/2016 15:48, White, Jason J wrote:
>> If the newer technology is relied upon, then the author can use it
>> inappropriately - and this may make a difference to conformance,
>> hence the new "feailure" cases become relevant.
>> 
>> Thus I think it all depends on the list of technologies relied upon,
>> not on dates or other factors.
> 
> But if the proposed failure is "failure for NOT using something" (e.g. aria landmarks or whatever), then clearly the author hasn't relied on that technology since they haven't used it...so that sort of failure wouldn't actually be possible, right?
> 
> P
> -- 
> Patrick H. Lauke
> 
> www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>